1. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 1 PHY Performance Evaluation with 60 GHz WLAN Channel Models Date: 2010-05-20 Authors:

2. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 2 Abstract This contribution presents the simulation results for PHY performance evaluation in terms of Packet Error Rate (PER) characteristics as functions of Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) over 60 GHz channel models for the Conference Room, Living Room, and Enterprise Cubicle environments describing in [1].

3. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 3 Introduction The goal of this contribution is to illustrate PHY performance (PER vs SNR curves) over developed 60 GHz channel models for the Conference Room (CR), Living Room (LR) and Enterprise Cubicle (EC) environments [1]. Simulation results were obtained for OFDM modulation and FEC scheme which is a standard Convolutional Code with polynomials {133 8,171 8 }.

4. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 4 PHY Channel Impulse Response Assumptions In accordance with EVM document [2]: Channel impulse response should be normalized on an instantaneous basis (packet-by-packet). Instantaneous normalization of the CIRs is performed after application of beamforming. Isotropic and basic steerable antenna model with directional antenna pattern defined as a Gaussian function with 30 0 mainlobe beamwidth and -20 dB backlobe may be applied on both TX and RX sides [1]. Directional TX and RX antenna patterns are steered toward the Maximum Power Ray (MPR beamforming) [1].

5. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 5 Simulated Channel Models AWGN channel model Simulated scenarios for Conference Room channel model: –STA-STA sub-scenario, omni TX to omni RX, LOS, w/o beamforming, w/o polarization support –STA-STA sub-scenario, directional TX to directional RX, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support –STA-STA sub-scenario, omni TX to directional RX, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support Note: Simulation results for STA-AP sub-scenario are not provided. STA-AP sub-scenario has the same PER vs SNR performance for MPR beamforming as an STA-STA sub-scenario due to the same intra cluster channel model parameters. Simulated scenarios for Living Room channel model: –Omni TX to omni RX, LOS, w/o beamforming, w/o polarization support –Directional TX to directional RX, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support –Omni TX to directional RX, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support Simulated scenarios for Enterprise Cubicle channel model: –Omni TX to omni RX, near STA location, LOS, w/o beamforming, w/o polarization support –Directional TX to directional RX, far STA location, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support –Omni TX to directional RX, far STA location, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support Note: Hardware impairments, timing acquisition, preamble detection, channel estimation and other impairments are not considered.

6. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 6 Summary of Main System Parameters of Simulated OFDM System System ParameterValue Sample rate2.56 GHz FFT size512 Number of data subcarriers336 Guard interval size1/4 – 128 samples Symbol duration250 ns OFDM symbol duration (50 ns GI + 200 ns useful symbol time) Subcarrier spacing5 MHz Modulations & Code ratesBPSK ½, QPSK ½, QPSK ¾, 16QAM ½, 16QAM ¾ Interleaver802.11a-like bit interleaver (28 columns x 12 rows) FECConvolutional coding {133 8, 171 8 }, zero tailing termination Packet size1912 bytes

7. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 7 Comparison of PER System Performance for LOS CR, LR, and EC Channel Models for Omni-to-Omni Antenna Configuration with AWGN Reference Curves For PER=10 -3 threshold: CR PER curves for MCSs with code rate ½ have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference performance ~0.4-0.7 dB. CR PER curves for MCSs with code rate ¾ have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference performance ~1.4-1.9 dB. LR PER curves for MCSs with code rate ½ have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference performance ~1.2-1.6 dB. LR PER curves for MCSs with code rate ¾ have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference performance ~3.5-4.0 dB. EC PER curves for STA near location scenario demonstrate approximately the same performance as for LR model (the difference is less than 0.3 dB).

8. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 8 PER System Performance for Different MCSs for NLOS CR Channel Model d-d – directional TX to directional RX o-d – omni TX to directional RX For PER=10 -3 threshold, CR PER curves for different MCSs for omni-to-directional antenna configuration in comparison with directional-to-directional case have performance loss ~0.3-1.5 dB.

9. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 9 PER System Performance for Different MCSs for NLOS LR Channel Model d-d – directional TX to directional RX o-d – omni TX to directional RX For PER=10 -3 threshold, LR PER curves for different MCSs for omni-to-directional antenna configuration in comparison with directional-to-directional case have performance loss ~0.8-2.0 dB.

10. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 10 PER System Performance for Different MCSs for NLOS EC Channel Model For PER=10 -3 threshold, EC PER curves (far location scenario) for different MCSs for omni-to-directional antenna configuration and directional-to-directioanal configuration have approximately the same performance (the difference is less than 0.2 dB). d-d – directional TX to directional RX o-d – omni TX to directional RX

11. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 11 Comparison of PER System Performance for NLOS CR, LR, and EC Channel Models for Directional-to-Directional Antenna Configuration with AWGN Reference Curves d-d – directional TX to directional RX For PER=10 -3 threshold CR and LR PER curves demonstrate similar system performance. In opposite case, EC curves have sufficient degradation. For MCSs with code rate ½: –CR (or LR) PER curves have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference curves equal to ~ 1.5-2.0 dB. –EC PER curves have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference curves equal to ~ 2.9-3.6 dB. For MCSs with code rate ¾: – CR (or LR) PER curves have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference curves equal to ~ 3.5 – 4.0 dB. –EC PER curves have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference curves equal to ~ 6.3-7 dB

12. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 12 Comparison of PER System Performance for NLOS CR, LR, and EC Channel Models for Omni-to-Directional Antenna Configuration o-d – omni TX to directional RX For PER=10 -3 threshold: LR PER curves for different MCSs in comparison with CR PER curves have performance loss ~ 0.3 dB. EC PER curves (far location scenario) for different MCSs in comparison with CR PER curves have performance loss ~ 1-1.8 dB.

13. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 13 Conclusion This contribution illustrates PHY performance evaluation in terms of Packet Error Rate (PER) characteristics as functions of Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) for OFDM modulation and simple FEC scheme over 60 GHz channel models for the Conference Room, Living Room and Enterprise Cubicle environments.

14. doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 14 References 1.IEEE doc. 802.11-09/0334r8. Channel models for 60 GHz WLAN systems, A. Maltsev et al, Mar. 2010. 2.IEEE doc. 802.11-09/0296r16. TGad Evaluation Methodology, Eldad Perahia, Jan. 2010.